“Yes, a lot depends on the reflection, but you should not feel stressed about writing it,” according to Milan Miljkovic, the initiator of the petition, that was the message given to Psychology students at the start of the year about the ‘substantiated analysis’, a 5000-word document in which they must reflect on how they have developed. It is sent to a committee, together with their portfolio and advice from the mentor, which then determines whether or not they progress to the second year.
Overworked
The students write the analysis based on feedback they have received from teachers throughout the year, instead of the usual grades. “We believe in this system,” says Miljkovic. “But there are a number of problems. Feedback is often sent very late. For example, I received feedback at the beginning of June for an assignment I had handed in at the beginning of March. That leaves you with no time to work on the points of improvement mentioned, or they’ve resolved themselves in another way already. Some comments are also completely unhelpful. ‘You have a cool vibe’, for example – what are you supposed to do with that? Other times, the comments are incredibly generalised, as if they’ve been generated by AI. For example, a comment such as ‘you can improve your expertise by showing you understand the material’, that tells you nothing about how you are supposed to do that.” He emphasises that this is not the fault of the tutors. “They are incredibly overworked. If you have four tutor groups, you have to read forty students’ work. It’s understandable that you can’t always give good feedback on time.”
Nonetheless, it is now the students who are faced with a struggle: it is hard to write good substantiated analysis without good feedback. Furthermore, they feel the information available is often incomplete or ambiguous. “For example, you ‘prove’ your progress by completing assignments, of which a maximum of two may be group projects,” says Miljkovic. “But on the list, assignments which people had completed as individual assignments were suddenly listed as ‘group projects’. That is a source of stress, sometimes right up to the deadline.”
Not unknown
The complaints are not unknown to the board, says vice dean of education Rob Ruiter, but the petition – now signed by over a quarter of first-year students – did come as a surprise to him. “Especially as this final assignment didn’t cause any issues last year. We would have preferred students express their concerns in a different manner. For example, there was recently a comprehensive questionnaire – which showed that a majority is satisfied with how things are, by the way. There were also office hours, which were barely used.”
That doesn’t change the fact that there is indeed room for improvement, he acknowledges. “We see and hear that. With a relatively new programme such as this, it is an ongoing process, which we discuss regularly with various bodies such as the Faculty Council and the Education Programme Committee.” Among the topics of discussion is more efficient communication. “With shorter communication lines between tutors, for example, so that you can adjust things more quickly in case of doubts.”
They also want to tackle the delay and the quality of the feedback. “Having to lead three tutor groups is too many in this system, we underestimated that. We’re going to plan that differently, so that teachers won’t have to do that again next year.” During the most recent Faculty Council meeting last Thursday, during which the petition was discussed, it was said that the workload is an important issue. The Board is aiming for less but better feedback from mentors and tutors.
Working on it
Faculty Council chair Michael Capalbo was pleased to hear that people are taking it seriously and offered the following advice: make it clear to everyone what you are working on. “People like to see that their recommendations are being taken seriously.” The Council is also pleased that changes are already being implemented. An earlier letter to the Board mentioned that they felt there was a lack of urgency.
Miljkovic agrees. According to him, the petition was essentially a last-ditch attempt, because students felt they were not being listened to.